ApproVEd: WIMW 

EDWARD B. 

Assistant United States Attorneys

 

THE HONORABLE JAMES L. COTT

United States Magistrate Jude

Southern District UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SEALED COMPLAINT
- v. - Violations of
. 18 use. 1343,

JAMES GATTO 1349, 1956(h), and 2
a/k/a ?Jim," -
MERL CODE, 
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, COUNTY OF OFFENSE:

JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and NEW YORK
MUNISH SOOD, 

Defendants.

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 33.:

JOHN VOURDERIS, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he
is a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and charges as follows:

COUNT ONE
(Wire Fraud.Conspiracy)

1. From at least in or about May 2017, up to and
including in or about September 2017, in the Southern District
of New York and elsewhere, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim," MERL CODE,
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the
defendants, and others known and unknown, willfully and
knowingly did combine, conspire, confederate, and agree together
and with each other to commit wire fraud in violation of Title
18, United States Code, Section 1343.

2. It was a part and object of the conspiracy that JAMES
GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD
AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, and others known and

unknown, willfully and knowingly, having devised and intending
to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for obtaining
money and property by means of false and fraudulent pretenses,
representations, and promises, would and did transmit and cause
to be transmitted by means of wire and radio communication in
interstate and foreign commerce, writings, signs, signals,
pictures, and sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme
and artifice, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1343, to Wit, GATTO, CODE, DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, SOOD and
others known and unknown, including basketball coaches employed
by University?6 and participated in a scheme to
defraud, by telephone, email, and wire transfers of funds, among
other means and methods, University?6 and University?7 by making
and concealing bribe payments to high school student?athletes
and/or their families in exchange for, among other things, the
student?athletes? commitment to play basketball for University?6
and University-7, thereby causing the universities to agree to
provide athletic scholarships to student?athletes who, in truth
and in fact, were ineligible to compete as a result of the bribe
payments.

3. It was a further part and object of the conspiracy
that JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS,
JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, and
others known and unknown, willfully and knowingly, having
devised and intending to devise a scheme and.artifice to
defraud, and for obtaining money and property by means of false
and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, would
and did transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire

 

1In addition to the scheme to defraud described herein, the
investigation has revealed another scheme whereby athlete
advisors make direct bribe payments to coaches at universities
in exchange for those coaches? agreement to influence and steer
players under their control to retain the relevant athlete
advisors. That additional scheme is the subject of two related
Complaints also unsealed today. See United States v. Chuck
Connors Person, et al., 17 Mag. and United States v. Lamont
Evans, et al., 17 Mag. . All universities and players
referenced in this Complaint and the two related Complaints have
been numbered sequentially. .Accordingly, the players referenced
in this Complaint begin with ?Player?10," and the universities
referenced in this Complaint begin with ?University-6."

2

 

and radio communication in interstate and foreign commerce,
writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds for the purpose
of executing such scheme and artifice, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1343, to wit, GATTO, CODE, DAWKINS,
AUGUSTINE, SOOD and others known and unknown, including
(basketball coaches employed by University?6 and University?7,
participated in a scheme to defraud, by telephone, email, and
wire transfers of funds, among other means and methods,
Universitym6 and University?7 by making and concealing bribe
payments to high school student?athletes and/or their families
in exchange for, among other things, the student?athletes?
commitment to play basketball for University?6 and University?7,
which deprived University?6 and University?7 of their right to
control the use of their assets, including the decision of how
to allocate a limited amount of athletic scholarships, and
which, if revealed, would have further exposed the universities
to tangible economic harm, including monetary and other
penalties imposed by the National Collegiate Athletic
Association (the 

(Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349.)

COUNT TWO
(Wire Fraud)

4. From at least in or about May 2017, up to and
including in or about September 2017, in the Southern District
of New York and elsewhere, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE,
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the
defendants, willfully and knowingly, having devised and
intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for
obtaining money and property by means of false and fraudulent
pretenses, representations, and promises, and attempting to do
so, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of wire
and radio communication in interstate and foreign commerce,
writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds for the purpose
of executing such a scheme and artifice, to wit, GATTO, CODE,
DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, SOOD and others known and unknown, including
basketball coaches employed at Universitym6 and University?7,
participated in a scheme to defraud, by telephone, email, and
wire transfers of funds, among other means and methods,
University~6 and University?7 by making and concealing bribe
payments to high school student?athletes and/or their families
in exchange for, among other things, the student?athletes?

commitment to play basketball for Universityw6 and University?7,
thereby causing the universities to provide athletic
scholarships to student?athletes who, in truth and in fact, were
ineligible to compete as a result of the bribe payments.

(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343, 1349, and 2.)


(Wire Fraud)

5. From at least in or about May 2017, up to and
including in or about September 2017, in the Southern District
of New York and elsewhere, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE,
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the
defendants, willfully and knowingly, having devised and
intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for
obtaining money and property by means of false and fraudulent
pretenses, representations, and promises, and attempting to do
so, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of wire
and radio communication in interstate and foreign commerce,
writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds for the purpose
of executing such a scheme and artifice, to wit, GATTO, CODE,
DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, SOOD and others known and unknown, including
basketball coaches employed by University?6 and University?7,
participated in a scheme to defraud, by telephone, email, and
wire transfers of funds, among other means and methods,
University?6 and University?7 by making and concealing bribe
payments to high school student~athletes and/or their families
in exchange for, among other things, the student?athletes?

commitment to play basketball for University?6 and University?7,
which deprived the universities of their right to control the
use of their assets, including the decision of how to allocate a
limited amount of athletic scholarships, and which, if revealed,
would have further exposed the universities to tangible economic
harm, including monetary and other penalties imposed by the
NCAA.

(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343, 1349, and 2.)

COUNT FOUR
(Money Laundering Conspiracy)

6. From at least in or about May 2017, up to and
including in or about September 2017, in the Southern District

of New York and elsewhere, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim," MERL CODE,
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the
defendants, and others known and unknown, willfully and
knowingly did combine, conspire, confederate, and agree together
and with each other to violate Title 18, United States Code,
Section 

7. It was a part and object of the conspiracy that JAMES
GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD
AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, and others known and
unknown, knowing that the property involved in a financial
transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful
activity, would and did conduct and attempt to conduct a
financial transaction, which in fact involved the proceeds of
specified unlawful activity, to wit, the wire fraud offenses
alleged in Counts One, Two, and Three of this Complaint, with
the intent to promote the carrying on of that specified unlawful
activity, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section


(Title 18, United States Code, Section 

The bases for deponent?s knowledge and for the foregoing
charges are, in part, as follows:

8. I am a Special Agent with the FBI, and I have been
personally involved in the investigation of this matter, which
has been handled by Special Agents of the FBI and Criminal
Investigators in'the United States Attorney?s Office for the
Southern District of New York (the I have been employed
by the FBI since 2014. I and other members of the investigative
team have experience in fraud and corruption investigations and
techniques associated with such investigations, including
executing search warrants, financial analysis, wiretaps, and
working with informants.

9. This affidavit is based in part upon my own
observations, my conversations with other law enforcement agents
and others, my examination of documents and reports prepared by
others, my interviews of witnesses, and my training and
experience. Because this affidavit is being submitted for the
limited purpose of establishing probable cause, it does not
include all of the facts that I have learned during the course
of the investigation. Where the contents of documents, including

5

emails, and the actions, statements and conversations of others
are reported herein, they are reported in substance and in part,
except where specifically indicated otherwise.

I. OVERVIEW OF THE INVESTIGATION

 

10. The charges in this Complaint result from a scheme
involving bribery, corruption, and fraud in intercollegiate
athletics. Since 2015, the FBI and USAO have been investigating
the criminal influence of money on coaches and athletes who
participate in intercollegiate basketball governed by the NCAA.
As relevant here, the investigation has revealed multiple
instances of bribes paid by athlete advisors, including
financial advisors and business managers, as well as high?level
apparel company employees, and facilitated by coaches employed
by NCAA Division I universities, to student~athletes playing at
or bound for NCAA Division I universities, and the families of
such athletes, in exchange for a commitment by those athletes to
matriculate at a specific university and a promise to ultimately
sign agreements to be represented by the bribeupayors once the
athletes enter the National Basketball Association 
Moreover, the investigation has revealed that scheme
participants take steps to conceal the illegal payments,
including by funneling them to athletes and/or their
families indirectly through surrogates and non?profit
institutions controlled by the scheme participants; and (ii)
making or intending to make misrepresentations to the relevant
universities regarding the involvement of student?athletes and
coaches in the violation of NCAA rules.

11. In particular, the investigation has revealed that
JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? the defendant a high?level executive
of a global athletic apparel company (?Company?l?) and MERL

CODE, the defendant an individual affiliated with Company?l
and its high school and college basketball programs conspired
with coaches for universities sponsored by Company?l to make
payments to high school basketball players and/or their families
in exchange for commitments by those players to attend and play
for the Company?l?sponsored university, and to sign with
Company?l upon turning professional. In addition, CHRISTIAN
DAWKINS, MUNISH SOOD, and JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the
defendants, brokered and facilitated the corrupt payments, in
exchange for a promise that the players also would retain the
services of DAWKINS, a business manager, and SOOD, a financial

advisor, upon turning professional. As set forth in more detail
below, in or around 2017, GATTO, CODE, DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, and
SOOD agreed to pay bribes to at least three high school
basketball players and/or their families in the following
manner: 

a. First, GATTO, CODE, DAWKINS and SOOD worked
together to funnel $100,000 from Company?1 to the family of a
high school basketball player (?Player?10?) in exchange for
Player~10?s commitment to play at an NCAA Division I university
whose athletic programs are sponsored by Company?1 (?University?
and in further exchange for a commitment from Player?10 to
retain DAWKINS and SOOD, and to sign with Company?1, once
Player?10 joined a professional basketball league.

b. Second, DAWKINS and AUGUSTINE agreed to
facilitate payments to the family of another high school
basketball player (?Player?11") in exchange for Player?11?s
commitment to play at Universitym6 and ultimately to retain
services.

c. Third, GATTO, CODE, DAWKINS, and AUGUSTINE agreed
to make payments of as much as $150,000 from Company?1 to
another high school basketball player (?Player?12?) in order to
secure Player-12?s commitment to play at an NCAA Division I
university whose athletic programs are also sponsored by
Company?1 (?University?7?). In exchange for the $150,000
payment, Player?12 similarly was expected to commit to retaining
services and signing with Companyml once Playerw12
joined a professional basketball league.

12. The scheme described herein served to defraud the
relevant universities in several ways. First, by virtue of
accepting and concealing payments that, if uncovered, would
render them ineligible to participate in Division I basketball,
the student~athletes and/or their family members conspired with
coaches and apparel company executives to obtain athletic?based
financial aid for the student-athletes from NCAA Division I
universities through false and fraudulent means. Indeed, for the
scheme to succeed and the athletic scholarships to be awarded
such that the athletes could play at a NCAA Division I
university, the student?athletes and coaches described herein
must falsely certify to the universities that they are unaware
of any rules violations, including the illegal payments. Second,

.7

 

the scheme participants further defrauded the universities, or
attempted to do so, by depriving the universities of significant
and necessary information regarding the non?compliance with NCAA
rules by the relevant student?athletes and coaches. In doing so,
the scheme participants interfered with the universities?
ability to control their assets and created a risk of tangible
economic harm to the universities, including, among other
things, decision?making about the distribution of their limited
athletic scholarships; the possible disgorgement of certain
profitwsharing by the monetary fines; restrictions on
athlete recruitment and the distribution of athletic
scholarships; and the potential ineligibility of the
university?s basketball team to compete in NCAA programs
generally, and the ineligibility of certain studentmathletes in
particular.

II. THE NCAA AND RELEVANT NCAA RULES

 

13. Based on my participation in this investigation, my
review of publicly available information, and my conversations
with other law enforcement agents who have reviewed such
information, I have learned the following:

a. The NCAA is a non?profit organization .
headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana, that regulates athletics
for over 1,000 colleges and universities, conferences, and other
associations. NCAA member schools are organized into three
separate divisions: Division I, Division II, and Division 
University?6 and University?7 are in Division I, which is
the highest level of intercollegiate athletics sanctioned by the
NCAA . i

b. Division I schools typically have the biggest
student bodies, manage the largest athletics budgets and offer
the most athletic scholarships. Among other things, Division I
schools must offer a minimum amount of financial assistance (in
the form of scholarships) to their athletes; however, the NCAA
sets a maximum number of scholarships available for each sport
that a Division I school cannot exceed. Currently, teams may
offer no more than 13 athletic scholarships for the 2017?2018
men?s basketball season.

14. The official rulebook governing Division I schools is
the NCAA Division I Manual (the ?Manual?), which is published

annually and which contains the NCAA Constitution and its
operating bylaws (the ?Bylaws?). Based on my review of the
Manual, I have learned the following, in relevant part:

a. Among the core principles for the conduct
of intercollegiate athletics is a directive that ?[s]tudent?
athletes shall be amateurs in an intercollegiate sport;? and
that ?student?athletes should be protected from exploitation by
professional and commercial enterprises The Constitution
further states that ?an institution found to have violated the
rules shall be subject to disciplinary and corrective
actions as may be determined by the 

b. Consistent with the core principles, any
financial assistance to student~athletes other than from the
university itself or the athletes? legal guardians is prohibited
without express authorization from the NCAA. In addition,
neither student?athletes, prospective student athletes, nor
their relatives can accept benefits, including money, travel,
clothing, or other merchandise, directly or indirectly from
outside sources such as agents2<or financial advisors. A
student?athlete is rendered ?ineligible? to participate in
Division I sports if the athlete is recruited by a university or
any ?representative of its athletics interests? in violation of
NCAA rules.

c. Coaches and other team staff at NCAA Division I
schools also are subject to various prohibitions, including 
facilitating contact between student?athletes and agents or
financial advisors; and (ii) receiving compensation directly or
indirectly from outside sources with respect to any actions
involving the student?athletes.

15. Based on my review of the NCAA Constitution and its

 

2 The NCAA Division I Bylaws define an ?agent? broadly as ?any
individual who, directly or indirectly, . . . seeks to obtain
any type of financial gain or benefit . . . from a student
athlete?s potential earnings as a professional athlete.?
Specifically included in the definition of ?agent? is, among
others, ?a certified contract advisor, financial advisor,
marketing representative, brand manager or anyone who is
employed or associated with such persons.?

9

Bylaws, I have learned that student?athletes, coaches, and staff

members of athletics departments must complete annual

certifications regarding their knowledge of NCAA rules

violations, and, in the case of student?athletes, their
continued eligibility to participate in NCAAwsponsored sports.

In particular:

a. On an annual basis, a student?athlete must ?sign
a statement . . . in which the student?athlete submits
information related to eligibility, recruitment, financial aid,
[and] amateur status,? which is known as the ?Student?Athlete

Statement." In the Student?Athlete Statement, the student?
athlete represents, among other things, that ?[a]ll information
provided to the NCAA . . . and the institution?s admissions
office is accurate and valid, including . . . [his] amateur
status? and that the student?athlete has ?reported to [his]
director of athletics . . . any violations of NCAA regulations
involving [him] and [his] institution." Furthermore, in signing

the Student?Athlete Statement, the Student?Athlete certifies
that ?to the best of [his] knowledge, [he] has not violated any
amateurism rules,? and has ?not provided false or misleading
information concerning [his] amateur status to the NCAA . . . or
the institution?s athletics department."

b. Coaches and staff members must certify annually
that they have reported to their university any knowledge of
violations of NCAA rules involving their institution.

c. In addition, the Bylaws prohibit student?athletes,
coaches and staff members of athletics departments from
?knowingly furnishing or knowingly influencing others to furnish
the NCAA or the individual?s institution false or misleading
information concerning an individual?s involvement in or
knowledge of matters relevant to a possible violation of an NCAA
regulation."

16. As set forth in the Bylaws, violations of NCAA rules
by a university or any individual may lead to penalties
including, but not limited to, limitations on a university?s
?participation in postseason play in the involved sport?;
financial penalties including ?requirements that an institution
pay a fine, return revenue received from a specific athletics
event or series of events, or . . . reduction[s] in or
elimination of monetary distribution by? the ?limitations

10

on the number of financial aid awards that may be provided" by
the university to student?athletes; and recruiting restrictions
including on the ability to conduct off?campus recruiting
activities or to communicate by telephone or letter with
prospective student?athletes.

RELEVANT INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES
.A.The Athletic Apparel Company (?Company-1?)

17. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my review of publicly available information, I have
learned that Company?l is a multinational corporation that
designs and manufactures shoes, clothing, and accessories for
multiple sports, including basketball. Company?l sponsors
numerous high school, college, and professional basketball
programs, including a program for amateur pre?college athletes,
and sponsors the athletic programs of a number of universities
that regularly have top?ranked Division I men?s basketball
teams, including University?6 and University?7.

B. JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim?

18. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my review of publicly available information, and my
review of calls and conversations recorded as a part of this
investigation, I have learned that JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? the
defendant, is the head of Global Sports Marketing Basketball
for Company?l. In that capacity, GATTO appears to oversee
significant components of Company?1?s high school and college
basketball programs, including facilitating payments to players
and their families as a part of the schemes described herein.

C. MERL CODE

19. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my review of publicly available information, and my
review of calls and conversations recorded as a part of this
investigation, I have learned that MERL CODE, the defendant, is
affiliated with Company?l and its high school and college
basketball programs, and participated in organizing some of the
payments made from Company?l to players'and their families as a
part of the schemes described herein. Prior to joining Company?

11

 

1, CODE worked as the Director of Elite Youth Basketball for a
rival athletic apparel company.

D. CHRISTIAN DAWKINS

20. Based on my review of publicly available
information, and my review of calls and conversations recorded
as a part of this investigation, among other sources, I know
that CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, was an employee of a
sports management company based in New Jersey between
in or about 2015 until in or about May 2017. Although DAWKINS is
not a registered agent3, the investigation has revealed that
job at primarily consisted of recruiting
athletes as clients and maintaining client relationships for the
firm. In or about May 2017, terminated DAWKINS in
connection with alleged misuse of an athlete?s credit
card to pay for expenses from a ride services company without
the athlete?s authorization. Since that time, as detailed below,
DAWKINS has endeavored, with the assistance of other scheme
participants, to start his own sports management business.

E. JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE

21. Based on my review of publicly available information
and my review of calls and conversations recorded as a part of
this investigation, I know that JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the
defendant, is the Program Director for an amateur, high school"
aged basketball team sponsored by Company?1 that participates in
the an amateur basketball league. AUGUSTINE is also the
President of a Florida?based registered 501(c)(3) charitable
organization whose stated purpose is to provide mentoring and
assistance to high school athletes to help them ?grow, develop
and achieve in the classroom as well as to secure a scholarship
to attend an accredited college or university.?

 

3 Based on my review of publicly available sources, I am aware
that becoming a registered sports agent with the NBA requires
approval by the NBA Players Association, the payment of annual
fees, and successful completion of a written examination. Only
individuals who have met these requirements may recruit or
represent NBA players.

12

F. MUNISH SOOD

22. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my review of publicly available information, I have
learned that MUNISH SOOD, the defendant, is the founder of an
investment services company (?the Investment Company?) and
serves as its Chief Investment Officer. The Investment Company
was founded in or about 2002 to provide investment management
services to institutional and family office clients. SOOD is a
registered investment advisor. Based on my conversations with a
COOperating witness who has been providing information to law
enforcement as a part of this investigation I have
learned that met SOOD in or about 2011 or 2012, and that
SOOD and have known and worked with each other for several
years.

(3.University?6

23. Based on my review of publicly available information,
I have learned that University?6 is a public research university
located in Kentucky. With approximately 22,640 students and over
7,000 faculty and staff members, it is one of the state?s
largest universities. University?6 fields approximately 21
varsity sports teams in NCAA Division I competition, including
men?s basketball.

 

4 Based on my participation in the investigation, including my
debriefings of CW-1, I am aware that ran a business
management firm that primarily serviced professional athletes,
as well as a registered investment advisory firm that provided
investment related services to Cle?s clients, including
athletes. Information provided by has been corroborated by,
among other things, recorded conversations, electronic
communications, and surveillance by law enforcement. began
cooperating with the Government in or about November 2014. All
of CW?l?s activities with respect to the defendants described in
this Complaint were conducted at the direction of law
enforcement. In or about September 2017, pleaded guilty to
securities fraud, wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and
making false statements pursuant to a cooperation agreement with
the Government. On or about May 6, 2016, agreed to settle
civil charges filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission
relating to CW?l?s violations of certain securities laws.

13

24. I know from publicly available information that, in
each year relevant to this Complaint, University?6 received
funds from the federal government in excess of $10,000 per year.



25. Based on my review of publicly available information,
I have learned that University?7 is a private research
university located in Florida. With approximately 16,000
students and over 2,600 faculty members, it is one of the
state?s largest universities. University-7 fields approximately
15 varsity sports teams in NCAA Division I competition,
including men?s basketball.

26. I know from publicly available information that, in
each year relevant to this Complaint, University?7 received
funds from the federal government in excess of $10,000 per year.

IV. ALLEGATIONS INVOLVING UNIVERSITY-6

27. As set forth in more detail herein, beginning in
approximately May 2017, and continuing into at least September
2017, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS,
and MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, and others known and unknown,
conspired to illicitly funnel approximately $100,000 from
Company?1 to the family of Player?10, an All?American high,
school basketball player; to assist one or more coaches at
University?6 in securing Player?10?s commitment to jplay at
University?6, a school sponsored by Company?1; and to further
ensure that Player?10 ultimately retained the services of
DAWKINS and SOOD and signed with Company?1 upon entering the
NBA. The bribe money was structured in a manner so as to conceal
it from the NCAA and officials at University?6 by, among other
things, having Company?1 wire money to third party consultants
who then facilitated cash payments to Player?10?s family.
Further, the scheme could only succeed, and Playermlo could only
receive an athletic scholarship from University?6, if the scheme
participants, including one or more coaches at University?6,
made false certifications to University-6.

28. I am also aware from my participation in this
investigation that the agreement to make payments to the family
of Player?10 was formulated in or around May 2017, after most of
the top high school recruits from the Class of 2017 had already

14'

 

committed to various universities and when, according to public
reporting, Player?10, who was considered one of the top recruits
nationally in his class, had indicated a desire to attend a
number of rival schools, and not University?6. Based on publicly
available information, I am aware that, on or about June 3,
2017, or almost immediately after the illicit bribe scheme set
forth herein was agreed to, Player-10 publicly announced his
intention to enroll at University?6. Contemporaneous press
accounts described the announcement as a ?surprise commitment?
that ?c[ame] out of nowhere? and a ?late recruiting coup? for
coaches at University?6.5

.A.1he Defendants Agree to Pay Player?10?s Family $100,000 to
matriculate at University-6, and Conceal the Payments
Through an Entity Set Up by DAWKINS

29. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my review of telephone calls over a cellular telephone
used by CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, that were intercepted
pursuant to judicial authorization (the ?Dawkins Wiretap"), and
my discussions with other law enforcement officers, I have
learned that in or around May of 2017, at the request of at
least one coach from University?6, DAWKINS, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a
?Jim,? MERL CODE, MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, and others agreed
to funnel $100,000 (payable in four installments) from Company?l
to the family of Player?10. Shortly after the agreement with the
family of Player?10 was reached in late May and early June,
Player?10 publicly committed to University?6.

30. I have further learned that,6 prior to paying Player?

 

5Based on my review of publicly available information, I have
learned that Player?10 is listed on the roster for the 2017?2018
University?6 men?s basketball team.

6Except as otherwise indicated, the bases for my knowledge of
the facts described in this Complaint are my participation in
this investigation; my training and experience; my discussions
with and undercover law enforcement agents who
participated in the investigation; and my review of the entirety
of each recorded telephone call or meeting cited herein, and,

15

10?s family, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? and MERL CODE, the
defendants, first needed time to generate a sham purchase order
and invoice ostensibly to justify using Company?1 funds since
they could not lawfully pay the family of Player?10 directly and
risk that such prohibited payments be revealed. Accordingly, in
or around July 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, working
with CODE, arranged for MUNISH SOOD, the defendant, and an FBI
undercover agent posing as a financial backer for
DAWKINS's and new sports management business, to make an
initial $25,000 payment to Player?10's family on Company?1?s
behalf, to be later reimbursed by Company?1. In particular, on
or about July 7, 2017, DAWKINS and CODE had the following
discussion in a telephone call that was intercepted by the
Dawkins Wiretap:

a. CODE told DAWKINS that he had ?bad news? about
the payments from Company?1 to Player?10?s family, adding that
?my group gets an email about the invoice? that ?ask[s] for
all these PO numbers and vendor numbers and blah blah blah blah
blah,? referring to the document generated internally at
Company?1 meant to explain the $100,000 being allocated to pay
the family of Player?10. CODE then explained to DAWKINS that he
had expected JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? the defendant, and
Company?1 to have handled the payment ?off the books,? noting
that ?group? had received payments that year that ?didn't
go through the system.?

b. CODE then informed DAWKINS that he had tried to
submit an invoice to Company-1 for the $100,000 payment, routed
through consulting company, but that when he submitted
the invoice ?for the whole [Universitym6] situation,? Company?1

 

where available, a transcript of the call or meeting. For every
instance in which I offer my interpretation of language used
during a recorded telephone call or meeting, that interpretation
is based on my training, experience, and participation in this
investigation, my review of the larger universe of recorded
telephone calls and meetings in addition to those contained
herein, and my discussions with and the undercover law
enforcement agents.

16

?didn?t have any record of organization in the system."
CODE described how he would have to ?create a vendor number? for
his company and then a ?purchase order? to justify the $100,000
payment, and, accordingly, they would not have access to the
funds for several weeks. CODE lamented to DAWKINS that GATTO had
not just ?flex[ed] his muscle and push[ed] it through the
system, but that's obviously not what?s happening,? and asked
whether DAWKINS could arrange for SOOD or to provide the
initial payment to Player?10?s father (?Father?2?Y7because
Father?2 had been pressuring them for the money. CODE also said
that SOOD or ultimately would be reimbursed for the initial
payment to Father?2.

31. On or about July 10, 2017, MERL CODE and MUNISH SOOD,
the defendants, spoke with in a telephone call that was
recorded by at the direction of law enforcement.8 During
the call, CODE, SOOD and discussed the need for to
fund the initial $25,000 payment to Father?2, and CODE explained
how athletic apparel companies masked other, similar payments to
high school athletes. In particular, during the July 10 call the
following, among other things, was discussed:

a. CODE, SOOD and discussed the possibility
that would put up, or ?front," the money needed to make the
first $25,000 payment to Playerw10?s family because, according
to CODE, ?long story short, it?s gotta go through some processes
[at Company?1] and steps and what have you, and it takes a
while, so we?re talking another two to three weeks before it
really runs through the corporate structure. .And the dad?s
expectations were that Christian was going to be able

 

7A related Complaint, United States v. Chuck Connors Person, et
al., 17 Mag. references a ?Father-1? who is a different
individual.

8Based on my participation in this investigation and my review
of a recording made by of the meeting, I know that on June
20, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, introduced CODE to
SOOD and during a meeting in New York, New York, and that
during this meeting, DAWKINS, CODE, SOOD and discussed, in
sum and substance and in part, their plan to make payments to
college basketball players and coaches, including CODE's utility
to the scheme as an insider of Company-1.

1'7

 

to help him do some things a month ago." CODE further explained
that CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, had called him and asked
him to make sure that SOOD and ?were aware of the
situation? and had asked them to provide the funds ?with the
understanding that they will be reimbursed? by Company?1. CODE
further suggested to SOOD and that ?for cleanliness and
lack of questions,? the money transfer to Father?2 should be in
cash. He then confirmed that the rationale for paying Father?2
was to ensure that Player?10 would sign with DAWKINS and
Company?l when he entered the NBA. On the call, agreed to
lend DAWKINS and CODE the initial $25,000 payment for Player?
10?s family, and CODE confirmed that ?reimbursement? to UCal by
Companyml could happen in ?a number of ways.?

b. CODE also told SOOD and that ?you guys are
being introduced to . . . how stuff happens with kids and
getting into particular schools and so this is kind of one of
those instances where we needed to step up and help one of our
flagship schools in [University?6], you know, secure a five star
caliber kid. Obviously that helps, you know, our potential
business . . . and that's an [Company-l-sponsored] school.?
Highlighting CODE's desire to disguise the fact that Company-1
funds ultimately would be used for the $100,000 payment to
Father?2, CODE further stated that by funneling the payments to
studentwathletes through third?party companies, Companyal was
?not engaging in a monetary relationship with an amateur
athlete, we?re engaging in a monetary relationship with a
business manager, and whatever he decides to do with it, that?s
between him and the family.? CODE added that ?we can?t get
involved directly in those kinds of situations and scenarios.?

SOOD and Pay Father-2 An Initial $25,000

1 32. On or about July 11, 2017, traveled from New
York, New York to the office of MUNISH SOOD, the defendant, in
Princeton, New Jersey. During the meeting, which recorded,
provided SOOD with $25,000 in cash intended for Father-2,

who, according to SOOD and CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant,
would be flying to the New York City area to receive it.

33. On or about July 13, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the
defendant, participated in a telephone call with a male who I
believe, based on my participation in the investigation and the
context of the call, was Father?2. During the call, which was

18

intercepted over the Dawkins Wiretap, Father?2 stated that he
was renting a car to travel to meet MUNISH SOOD, the defendant.
DAWKINS told Father?2 that SOOD had $19,500 for Father?2, and
that DAWKINS would take care of ?everything else."

34. On or about July 14, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS and
MUNISH SOOD, the defendants, participated in a telephone call
that was intercepted over the Dawkins Wiretap. During the call,
DAWKINS and SOOD discussed the meeting with Father?2, and SOOD
confirmed that he had given Father?2 the cash, adding that SOOD
believed they had secured Player?10?s commitment to attend
[University?6] and ultimately to retain DAWKINS and the new
sports management company he was forming with SOOD, among
others. DAWKINS responded, ?that kid could come over my house,
and have a key. Like that?s what I do.? DAWKINS further stated
that if Player?10 was ?one and done,? meaning that if Player?10
played one year of collegiate sports before entering the NBA
draft, ?he may be top 20,? but that if Player?10 played
collegiate basketball for two years, he ?should be a top ten
pick."

c.1?e Delay in Securing $100,000 From Company-l to Pay
Player-10?s Family and Concealment of the True
Purpose of the Funds

35. On or about July 24, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS and MERL
CODE, the defendants, spoke on a telephone call that was
intercepted over the Dawkins Wiretap. During the call, DAWKINS
expressed concern with the delay by CODE and JAMES GATTO, a/k/a
?Jim," the defendant, in securing the $100,000 in funds from
Company41 to pay Player?10 and his family, telling CODE that he
did not want anything ?funky? to happen to the funding because
DAWKINS did not have $100,000 of his own money to pay Player?10.
CODE agreed, telling DAWKINS that he might have to ?lean on? a
senior executive at Companyrl (?Senior Executive?1") ?and some
of his side hustle off the book shit? in order to finance the
payments. CODE and DAWKINS then discussed how GATTO and others
at Company?1 were accounting for the unlawful transfer of funds
to Player?10?s family by booking it on Company?1?s records as a
payment to an outside organization affiliated with CODE. When
DAWKINS expressed surprise that GATTO was putting the payments
on Company-1?s books at all, CODE confirmed that GATTO had
identified it ?as a payment to my team, to my organization, so

19

it?s on the books, [but] it?s not on the books for what it?s
actually for.?9

July 27 meeting: DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, and a
university-6 coach Discuss Payments from company-l to
Another High School Basketball Player

36. On or about July 27, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS and
JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the defendants, met in a hotel room in
Las Vegas, Nevada, with and an assistant coach from
University-6 (?Coachal?) (the ?July 27 Meeting?). Prior to the
meeting, the FBI placed video recorders inside of the hotel
room; also recorded the meeting. Based on my participation
in the investigation, including my review of the recordings of
the July 27 Meeting, as well as my debriefing of I am
aware that at the July 27 Meeting, the following was discussed,
in sum and substance, and in part:

a. DAWKINS explained to the group that ?the player
we?re talking about tonight is [Player?11] with 
and noted that DAWKINS had dealt with coaches at University?6 on
the recruitment of Player?10. DAWKINS then laid out the plan to
funnel money to the family of Player?11, a high school
basketball player who was expected to graduate in 2019, stating

that ?the mom is like . . . we need our fucking money. So we got
to be able to fund the situation,? adding ?we?re all working
together to get this kid to [Universityn6]. Obviously, in turn,

 

9 Based on my participation in this investigation, I am aware
that GATTO and CODE started making plans in mid?September 2017
to submit another false and fraudulent invoice to Company?1 for
the second $25,000 payment due to Father?2 in November 2017. In
particular, on or about September 13, 2017, GATTO and CODE spoke
on a telephone call that was intercepted pursuant to a
judicially authorized wiretap on a cellphone used by CODE (the
?Code Wiretap?). On the call, GATTO asked CODE, ?When?s the next
uhh payment we gotta make for uhh [Player?10]?? and CODE
responded that they had agreed to make four payments of $25,000
each, ?so I would tell you probably November.? GATTO then told
CODE that they should ?get the invoice in now,? adding that
?it?s probably going to take a month, haha, in our system

Let?s just get that out of the way now.? GATTO noted that they
would ?figure out the other fifty in 

20

the kid will come back to us,? referring to himself and the
business he was forming with the help of MUNISH SOOD, the
defendant, and 

b. Noting that University?6 was already on probation
with the NCAA, DAWKINS indicated that they wOuld have to be
particularly careful with how they passed money to Player?11 and
his family. Coach?1 agreed, stating ?we gotta be very low key.?
DAWKINS added, ?The biggest thing is just making sure that-every
month Brad gets what he needs? in order to funnel
the payments to Player?ll and his family. .AUGUSTINE noted that
Company?l, which sponsored his amateur team, would be supportive
of their recruitment efforts, and confirmed that ?all my kids
will be [Company?1] kids.? DAWKINS concluded that their plan to
funnel money to Player?ll and/or his family in exchange for
Player?11?s commitment to attend University?6 and to sign with
DAWKINS and Companywl ?works on every angle. We have Merl 
the defendant] at [Company?l], we have Brad out with
the kid, and we have nodding at Coach?1.

c. DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, and then discussed the
logistics of how to get their share of the funding from DAWKINS
and to AUGUSTINE each month without the payments being
detected. AUGUSTINE suggested that the ?easiest way? would be to
send the money to ?nonmprofit for the grassroots
team,? although AUGUSTINE confirmed that he also would accept
cash. then handed AUGUSTINE an envelope containing $12,700
in cash, which DAWKINS explained ?will take care of July, of
August." UCwl suggested to Coach?1 that the payment would
?mak[e] [University?6] and your program happy in the sense that

the kid is . . . going to [University?6], and after [University~
he's gonna come back to us.?
d. At the meeting, AUGUSTINE stated that he expected

Company?l to fund at least a portion of the future payments to
Player?11 and/or his family because, referring to a coach for
the University?6 men?s basketball team (?Coach?2?), ?no one
swings a bigger dick than [Coach?2]? at Company?1, adding that
?all [Coach?2 has to do] is pick up the phone and call somebody,
[and say] these are my guys, they?re taking care of us."
DAWKINS, and Coach?1 then discussed ensuring that Playerw
ll ultimately signed with DAWKINS upon entering the NBA, and
Coach?1 explained that ?[Coach?2] is not a guy to have his own
agent already set up? so that it would fall upon Coach?l and

21

another assistant coach at University?6 to steer the athletes to
certain advisors. With respect to Player?11, AUGUSTINE noted
that ?on my end, when I send my kids to college, before I send
them, I?m having that conversation,? and ?with [Player?11], this
is done.?

e. Shortly thereafter, Coach?1 left the room, and
DAWKINS, AUGUSTINE, and proceeded to discuss the
Player?10 scheme described in paragraphs 27 to 35, supra, and,
in particular, the involvement of Coach?2 in securing funding
from Company?1 for Player?10?s family. DAWKINS, who had been
negotiating directly with Player?10?s family, noted that
Company?1 had originally agreed to pay a ?certain number? to
Player?10?s family, but that a rival athletic apparel company
was ?coming with a higher number,? such that DAWKINS needed to
?get more? from Company?1 to secure Player~10?s commitment to
attend University-6. DAWKINS then said that he had spoken with
Coach?2 about getting additional money for Player?10?s family
and informed Coach?2 that need you to call Jim Gatto, [the
defendant,] who?s the head of everything? at Company?1?s
basketball program.

37. Based on my review of call records, I am aware that on
or about May 27, 2017, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? the defendant,
had two telephone conversations with a phone number used by
Coacha2. Based on the same, I am aware that on or about June 1,
2017, GATTO had a third telephone conversation with the same
phone number used by Coach?2. .As noted above, two days later, on
or about June 3, 2017, Playerm10 officially committed to
University?6 in return for the commitment by GATTO and Company?1
to pay $100,000 to his family.

E.LMWKINS Explains to UC-2 the Different Schemes to Defraud
Engaged in by the Defendants

38. In or around June 2017, acting at the direction
of law enforcement, introduced another FBI undercover agent
as a business associate of UCwl who, along with 

would be involved in providing the funding needed by CHRISTIAN
DAWKINS, the defendant, to set up a new sports management
company after DAWKINS was fired from as is described
above. On or about August 8, 2017, called DAWKINS and,
during the call, which recorded, informed DAWKINS that
would be traveling internationally for the next month but

22

that both and would be available to meet with coaches
and/or players in UC?l?s absence, and to continue to fund
payments per their prior discussions.

39. Accordingly, on or about August 16, 2017, CHRISTIAN
DAWKINS, the defendant, spoke with on a telephone call that
was recorded by to explain to the status of the
various schemes, including the scheme to make the payments to
Player?10 and Player?ll and their families described above, as
well as additional payments DAWKINS and would need to make
in the upcoming weeks. In particular, based on my review of a
recording of the August 16 call and my discussions with UCM2, I
have learned that DAWKINS and discussed the following, in
substance and in part:

a. DAWKINS confirmed that he had facilitated the
first $25,000 payment10 to Player?10 and that MERL CODE, the
defendant, had reimbursed DAWKINS on behalf of Company?l through
a payment to ?Loyd Inc. account." DAWKINS also
explained to that they would need additional money for ?two
particular kids, one was [Player?10] who we?re already involved
with, we already got him done, so basically we just need to take
care of his dad with two grand adding gotta just
figure out how we get the two grand to him every month.? With
respect to the second athlete, Player?ll, DAWKINS told that
University?6 would need to get ?five grand? to JONATHAN BRAD
AUGUSTINE, the defendant, by August 25 so that AUGUSTINE could
pass it on to Playermll?s family.

b. DAWKINS further explained to that AUGUSTINE
was an important asset to the scheme because he runs a ?big time
AAU grassroots program? and has ?two kids that have a chance to

both be ?one and done? kids. . . . one?s name is [Player?l2],
[Player?12] is like the number seven ranked player in the
country, and one is named [Player?ll], who is also top ten in

the country. [Player~ll] is the kid who [University?6] is
basically wanting to get financed right now, via Brad. So we?re
giving Brad five a month for [Player?11?s] mom?s bills and that

 

10As is described above, at suggestion, CODE asked 
to provide the funds for the initial $25,000 payment to Father?
2, informing Ule that later would be reimbursed for these
funds.

23

 

 

kind of stuff.? As noted above, AUGUSTINE is the Program,
Director for an amateur AAU basketball team; I have confirmed
from publicly available information that Player~ll played for
AAU team.

c. DAWKINS also proposed to that they fund
non?profit organization, which had the potential to
generate multiple top?level basketball players for 
company, adding that ?everything that can be put into his
nonprofit is a write off, obviously, a tax deduction? so ?it?s
not just like a normal payment to player" and could ?be of
benefit to everybody across the board.?

d. DAWKINS told that he was in the ?process of
signing people to agreements,? including the family members of
the student?athletes to whom they were funneling money, because
want us as protected as possible across the board," adding
that ?obviously, we have to put funding out, and obviously some
of it can't be completely accounted for on paper because some of
it is, whatever you want to call it, illegal.?

F.Financial Records Show That Company-1 Funds were USed to
Reimburse DAWKINB for the $25,000 Payment to Father?2

40. I have reviewed banking records for an account
belonging to ?Loyd, Inc.," a company that I believe is owned by
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant (the ?Loyd Account?). From
those records I have learned that, on or about August 1, 2017,
DAWKINS deposited a $25,000 check into the Loyd Account. The
memo line on the check read ?consulting fees.?

41. Based on my review of financial records for the
account associated with the $25,000 check, I have learned that:

a. The $25,000 check was issued from a bank account
held in the name of an individual (?Individual?l?) and an AAU
basketball program Program?l?). Based on my review of
publicly available sources, I have determined that AAU Program?l
is sponsored by Company?l.

b. On or about August 1, 2017, the bank account held
in the name of Individual?l and AAU Program?l received an
incoming transfer of $30,000 from an account associated with a

24

Company?1 entity based in North America.

Defendants Cbntinue to Pay AUGUSTINE and Father?2 As
Part of the Scheme

42. Based on my participation in this investigation,
including my discussions with I am aware that, on or about
August 23, 2017, met with MUNISH SOOD, the defendant, in
Manhattan, New York, in order to provide SOOD with a cash
payment of $20,000. The meeting was recorded by Prior to
the meeting, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the defendant, and had
discussed, on a call that was recorded by among other
things, that $5,000 of this money would be provided by SOOD to
JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the defendant, and that $2,000 of this
money would be provided by SOOD to Father-2 as part of the
agreement to pay Player?10 and/or his family in order to ensure
that Player?10 would retain new company in the
future.11

V. ALLEGATIONS INVOLVING UNIVERSITY-7

 

43. As set forth in more detail herein, beginning in
approximately July 2017, and continuing into at least September
2017, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE, CHRISTIAN 
and JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the defendants, and others known
and unknown, conspired to illicitly funnel approximately
$150,000 from Company?1 to Player?12, another top high school
basketball player expected to graduate in 2018, to assist one or
more coaches at University?7 in securing Player?12?s commitment
to play at University?7, and to further ensure that Player?12
ultimately signed with DAWKINS and with Company?1 upon entering
a professional league. Moreover, because Companywl could not
make the payments to Player?12 or his family directly, GATTO,
CODE, DAWKINS, and AUGUSTINE planned to conceal the payments by
funneling them through CODE, DAWKINS and AUGUSTINE, as well as

 

11As discussed on the call, DAWKINS relayed that the remainder of
the $20,000 would be paid to other individuals not relevant to
this Complaint.

25

an amateur basketball team controlled by AUGUSTINE.

CODE and DAWKINS Discuss the Involvement of university-7
Coaches in Funneling Payments to Player-12

44. On or about August 9, 2017, CHRISTIAN DAWKINS and
MERL CODE, the defendants, discussed on a telephone call
intercepted over the Dawkins Wiretap paying Player?12
and/or his family at the request of at least one coach at
University?? (?Coach?3?). During the call, DAWKINS and CODE
discussed the involvement of Coach?3 in ensuring that
Company?1 would funnel payments to Player?12 in order to
secure Player?12?s commitment to play at Universitym7. In
particular, on the call, DAWKINS told CODE that, according
to JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, the defendant, ?[Coach?3] knows
everything,? and that they could ?start the process? to
funnel the payments to Player-12 in order to ensure that
Player?12 would commit to attend University?7 upon his
graduation in 2018. With respect to the need to funnel
money to Playerw12, DAWKINS further informed CODE that
Coach?3 ?knows something gotta happen for it to get done,?
and CODE replied that he had just left a message for JAMES
GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? the defendant, regarding the payment.

.B.Ihe Defendants Discuss a $150,000 Payment to Player-12 to
Ensure That Player-12 would Choose university?7 Over a
Rival university

45. On or about August 11, 2017, JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,?
and MERL CODE, the defendants, spoke twice on telephone calls
that were intercepted pursuant to the Code Wiretap. During those
calls, GATTO and CODE discussed, among other things, Coach?3's
request to GATTO that Company?1 make a $150,000 payment to
Player?12 in order to prevent Player?12 from committing to
attend another NCAA Division I university sponsored by a rival
athletic apparel company that allegedly had offered Player?l2 a
substantial sum of money. In particular, I have learned that:

a. On their initial call that day, CODE and GATTO
discussed funneling payments from Company?l to Player?12 in
order to influence Player?12?s decision to attend University?7,
a school sponsored by Company?1. In particular, on the call,
CODE informed GATTO that they had ?another [University?6]
situation? referring to the scheme described above in

26

paragraphs 27 to 35 involving Player?10 and University?6 
adding, ?except it?s with [University-7] this time.? When GATTO
inquired whether University?7 was ?hot,? CODE explained that
?[University-7] wants this kid named GATTO
confirmed that he knew already about University?7?s request for
Player?12, and told CODE that he had. spoken to Coacha3,12 who had
?just asked about the kid and then he said supposedly the kid

was having a meeting with? Senior Executive?1 at a Company?1
sponsored program geared toward high school amateur athletes

that occurred between on or about August 3 and August 7, 2017.

b. On a second call later the same day, CODE
discussed with GATTO, in sum and substance, and in part,-the
involvement Of CHRISTIAN DAWKINS and JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE,
the defendants, in the scheme to facilitate payments to Player?
12 in order to secure Player~12?s commitment to attend
University?7. CODE explained that another Division I university
(?University?4") was offering Player?12 $150,000 ?and we?re
trying to keep him from going to one of their schools.?13 CODE
further told GATTO that DAWKINS and AUGUSTINE had asked CODE
whether GATTO ?would be able to keep him at [University?7]
because they really want the kid.? GATTO confirmed that Player?
12 would be a rising senior in high school, and CODE assured
GATTO that the payments need not be ?all in one lump sum. I can,
I can make it work . . further noting that this situation
was ?not one of those where I need an answer today. You know
what I am saying? I just wanted to put it on your plate.?

c. On the same call, GATTO inquired whether Company?
1 would ?have to match the [University?4] deal?,? and asked if
the payments Could be pushed to 2018 noting ?if I have to pay it
out in ?18, that?s fine? but adding just don?t know if I, I
just don?t know if I can do anything in ?17 that?s what I?m

 

12Based on my review of call records for a cellphone used by
GATTO, I am aware that, on or about August 6, 2017 (a few days
before the call between CODE and GATTO discussed in this
paragraph), GATTO had two telephone calls with a cellphone
number believed to be used by Coach?3.

Based on publicly available information, I am aware that the
University~4 athletic program, including its men?s basketball

team, is sponsored by a rival athletic apparel company.

27

saying.? Referring to the scheme involving Player?10 detailed
above, GATTO further told CODE that he should ?try to get it to,
what did we do with [Player?10], a 100,? which I believe is a
reference to the $100,000 payment to Player?10. CODE replied
that he was not sure ?they?ll take that much less but if I can
take it down at least twenty five,? to which GATTO responded,
?Alright, well let?s just see.?

46. I have reviewed a telephone call on or about August
12, 2017 between MERL CODE and CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, the
defendants, that was intercepted pursuant to both the Dawkins
Wiretap and the Code Wiretap. On the call, CODE relayed the
substance of discussion with JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,?
the defendant, regarding payments by Company?1 to Player?12,
including request that CODE negotiate the $150,000
asking price set by Player?12. According to CODE, however, if
willing to" pay the full $150,000, ?then
that?s where the kid is going to go.? Referring to 
statement that he did not have sufficient funds to pay Player?12
in 2017, CODE stated that if Company?1 waited until January 2018
to commit to a payment amount, ?by that point that number might
be 200,? $200,000, adding that Company~1 ?won't play if
it?s . . . at that level, we won?t play." DAWKINS asked what
would be the highest payment that GATTO and Company?1 would
agree to, and CODE replied, think they do 150 if, if [Coach?
3] stayed on it." 

47. On or about August 19, 2017, MERL CODE and JONATHAN
BRAD AUGUSTINE, the defendants, spoke on a telephone call that
was intercepted pursuant to the Code Wiretap. During the call,
CODE informed AUGUSTINE that he would do what was necessary ?to
make sure that we secure[] the kid? but that ?budget-wise,
everything was kind of strapped for ?17. . . So ?18 puts us in a
better place to have that conversation.?

28

WHEREFORE, deponent respectfully requests that warrants be
issued for the arrests of JAMES GATTO, a/k/a ?Jim,? MERL CODE,
CHRISTIAN DAWKINS, JONATHAN BRAD AUGUSTINE, and MUNISH SOOD, the
defendants, and that they be imprisoned or bailed, as the case
may be.



Joyyz/I VOURDERIS
Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sworn to before me this
25th day of September, 2017

THE NO BLE JAMES L. COTT
UNI ED ATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SO DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

 

29